Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Charles Goyette, the most independent talk show host in America, discusses the current financial crisis, the idiocy of the bailout and the media’s support of it, the cost of war, the fault of the Fed in the crisis, know-nothing madman John McCain, the end of the republic and those horrible warfare/welfare statists who dare to call themselves libertarians.

Great interview, just wanted to tell you why liberals hate Wal-Mart: Wal-Mart is anti-union. Unions are almost holy to liberals and anyone who opposes them is a fascist, especially libertarians because they see libertarianism as an extreme right-wing movement. They either don’t make the connection that lower prices help poor people or that the prices there aren’t low enough given how “exploitative” Wal-Mart is.

Charles:
The problem with Walmart is that they use the local and state governments (providing them with tax breaks), and then because of their low overhead from taxes and their marketing deals can undercut the local stores. The local stores are driven out of business and the small town local economy is heavily weighted toward one supplier, Walmart.
I am a proponent of buying locally when possible. This is because I want to encourage local businesses and entrepeneurs. When money is spent on the local economy the money recycles itself and everyone locally benefits. When buying from Walmart, the money either goes to Arkansas and the stock holders of Walmart or to China and Mexico where many of their products are made. I am not against international trade, but it should not be at the expense of the local economy. I agree that if a local business is bad it should not be encouraged, but Walmart has caused many good local businesses to go under because of their economic advantages (partly state, partly by their overly agressive size).
I don’t know if you saw a Frontline report a few years ago that gave examples of US companies (Rubbermaid) that were suppliers to Walmart. Because of their contracts with Walmart are now out of business. Walmart threatens to move their business to other companies (often to China), unless the US company lowers its cost to Walmart. Walmart continues to undercut the US company until it is no longer making a profit to sell to Walmart. But since Walmart’s contract is such a huge part of their business they can’t afford not to. So Rubbermaid closed its doors instead of gutting their company to deal with life after Walmart.
It’s not just the union/sweatshop arguement that causes many liberals like myself to stay away from Walmart. It’s their overall business plan, and its effects on the local economies of small towns.

How about the term Classical Liberalism as a replacement for Libertarianism?

I think Liberals, Libertarians and Paleoconservatives are going to have to get together. If Liberals can deal with White Democrats (I know of a few of those Hillary supporters) who would rather drop dead than vote for a black man then they can live with Paleoconservatives. No one wants chaos and serfdom!

I just wanted to agree with Alex about why WalMart is a monster for small business, communities and workers. Check out the film WalMart: The High Cost of Low Price at http://www.walmartmovie.com/.

On a larger scale, I think WalMart brings up a question for libertarians. Why is it only government power that is bad? When power is super-concentrated in the hands of a corporation like WalMart, or maybe Goldman Sachs is also getting that way, aren’t the effects just as destructive? Maybe worse, since there is no way to address them. What do libertarians have to say corporations that are bigger and more powerful than many governments?

The folly of the “anti-statist” libertarian position is that it leads, paradoxically, directly to the state tyranny we now see coming to pass.

Why?

Because, hostile as libertarians are to government, they don’t take into account the implications of the fact that there always, inevitably, IS a government.

The exercise of unbridled economic power by the wealthy elite, favored by social Darwinist libertarians who believe that people should be allowed to do whatever they want with their money, means that — ineluctably — the wealthy elite will seize control of the government and use it to impose tyranny on the rest of us.

The supposedly anti-authoritarian libertarians believe that the only legitimate power in society is the power of private money, as opposed to the power of the state. But government under such an ideology must necessarily result in an authoritarian state controlled by a tiny, ultra-wealthy elite.

As long as Libertarians deny working people the right to organize and thereby enter the economic situation with some leverage, they will never gain traction with working class people. They will, however, be seen as the ultimate source of acquisitiveness without ethics and state-aided transfer of wealth (through payroll taxes, inflation, and social welfare for the corporate militarists) from the poor and middle class. Sad to say, the libertarian kool-aid has been drunk by and has been abused by the plutocrats. The Libertarian philosophy of “free markets” has provided the rationale for the legalized bribery of campaign contributions and lobbying, and for the failure of markets to regularize themselves. The invisible hand, as someone said, has palsy. Until libertarians understand that their idealistic and practical approach has been appropriated into fascist ideology, they will never be able to form a coalition with labor or people who believe in a commons and the promotion of the general welfare.

When the insiders jump ship, it is a signal of what is coming. I don’t think it was just sellers guessing what they think everyone will think. They really thought stocks would tank. 700 billion from congress plus 600 billion from the fed in new credit, so 1.3 Trillion in new money thats hyper inflation plus the normal trillion for the war.

McBama have both been saying Iraq is 10 billion a week, but it’s a lot more than that. They don’t include the money from the state department, the department of energy, the DHS etc.

Scott good point about the uniformity of the news. You agree with us or things will be way worse and you’re an idiot if you disagree. . I was arguing that down all day with people. The Fed has to die.

The Pentagon aims to achieve a first-strike capability, for blackmail or ?
The Russians may have no choice but Launch On Warning. Computer malfunction, mistake because “the bloody Pentagon” (Brigadier Harbottle) aims to achieve a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability.

The fact that the corporate and political elite often seek to cloak their economic exploitation in the language of the “free market” should no more discredit the concept of an actual free market than should the fact that wars are often sold on “humanitarian” grounds discredit actual humanitarianism.

True libertarians — and I’ll admit there’s a lot of corporate shills masquerading as ones — should oppose state infringements on freedom of association, which would include supporting an overturn of restrictions on labor unions like Taft-Hartley (signed into law by establishment liberal icon Harry Truman), which bans sympathy boycotts and infringes on the right of parties to freely negotiate the terms of contracts with so-called “right to work” laws.